R v Toma

[1999] NSWCCA 350

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Murder
3. › Causation
4. › Whether special direction on causation required
5. › Whether direction on reasonable foreseeability of third-party intervention necessary where Crown identified act causing death as deliberate stabbing
1. Criminal Law
2. › Murder
3. › Provocation
4. › Directions to jury
5. › Whether trial judge's remarks eliminated provocation from jury's consideration
6. › Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 23(2)(b)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Evidence on sentence
4. › Admissibility of opinion evidence of remorse
5. › Whether opinion that prisoner was remorseful admissible
6. › Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 65(8), 135
1. Evidence
2. › Opinion evidence
3. › Admissibility
4. › Opinion as to remorse in sentencing proceedings
5. › Whether statement of opinion admissible under hearsay exception
6. › Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 65(1), 65(8), 135

Quick Take

Where the Crown identifies the act causing death as a deliberate act of stabbing, and the jury is directed that they must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the act was a deliberate act of the accused, there is no real issue about causation requiring a special direction on reasonable foreseeability of third-party intervention. An opinion that a prisoner is remorseful is not admissible where the basis for the opinion is not disclosed, and may be rejected under s 135 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) as having no probative value in those circumstances.